Abstract P6-05-11: Active surveillance versus conventional treatment in low-risk DCIS; women’s preferences in the LORD trial
Authors: Renée S. Schmitz, Ellen G. Engelhardt, Miranda A. Gerritsma, Carine M. Sondermeijer, Sena Alaeikhanehshir, Ellen Verschuur, Marja van Oirsouw, Julia Houtzager, Rosalie Griffioen, Nina Bijker, Ritse M. Mann, Frederieke van Duijnhoven, Jelle Wesseling, Eveline Bleiker
Journal: Cancer Research (2023)

Abstract Background: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a potential precursor to breast cancer. Its incidence has increased multifold with the introduction of breast cancer screening and makes for 20% of all malignant breast lesions in women. DCIS has the potential to progress into invasive breast cancer. However, the majority of DCIS lesions are indolent and will never progress during the patient’s lifetime. Consequently, there is a growing concern of overdiagnosis and overtreatment for women with DCIS. The LORD trial is a non-randomized, patient preference trial comparing active surveillance to conventional treatment (i.e., breast conserving surgery with or without radiotherapy or mastectomy). The primary outcome of this trial is the percentage of women without an occurrence of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer after 10 years of follow up. Within the patient preference design, women are free to opt for either treatment arm. In addition to active surveillance of the DCIS, quality of life (QOL) of women included in the LORD trial is also actively monitored. The aims of this study were to: a) describe the distribution of participants within the treatment arms, b) identify women’s motives to opt for their preferred treatment arm, and c) assess factors associated with a preference for either treatment arm. Methods: Data from the baseline patient QOL questionnaire was collected. This questionnaire was completed after the women’s diagnosis and first consultation with their physician. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the distribution in both treatment arms. Thematic analyses were used to describe self-reported reasons for treatment selection derived from the open-ended question about treatment preference. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to assess associations between the patient characteristics and their preferred treatment arm. Results: In total 384 women completed the baseline questionnaire, of which 376 entered their final treatment decision. Of these women, 287 (76%) opted for active surveillance and 89 (24%) for conventional treatment. Most frequently cited reason for opting for active surveillance was that treatment was not yet necessary (55%). Also, patients’ reasons for preferring active surveillance alluded to a high level of trust in the active surveillance plan (24%) and that disease progression could be picked up and treated in a timely manner (14%). Furthermore, 11% of patients cited the advice of their healthcare professional as a reason for opting for active surveillance and 8% cited reasons relating to altruism. Most reported reasons for opting for the conventional treatment arm were avoiding unnecessary risks (26%), avoiding cancer worry (18%), the notion that what doesn’t belong, should be removed from the body (18%) and a need for closure (13%). In multivariable logistic regression analyses, high level of education (OR 2.17; 95%CI 1.09-4.38) and higher knowledge score (OR 1.8; 95%CI 1.07-3.02) were associated with a preference for conventional treatment. Furthermore, women opting for active surveillance more often reported the decision to be a shared decision between them and their healthcare professional (OR 2.30; 95%CI 1.18-4.47) compared to women who chose conventional treatment, who more often reported decision-making to be patient-driven. Age and tolerance of uncertainty were not significantly associated with treatment preference. Conclusion: The LORD trial is the first to actively offer women with low-risk DCIS a choice between conventional treatment and active surveillance. Within this trial, most women opt for active surveillance, even though clinical guidelines still recommend treatment for all women with DCIS. Women with low-risk DCIS report high levels of trust in their physicians and the safety of active surveillance. Their preferences also highlight the necessity to proof that de-escalating treatment of low-risk DCIS is safe. Citation Format: Renée S. Schmitz, Ellen G. Engelhardt, Miranda A. Gerritsma, Carine M. Sondermeijer, Sena Alaeikhanehshir, Ellen Verschuur, Marja van Oirsouw, Julia Houtzager, Rosalie Griffioen, Nina Bijker, Ritse M. Mann, Frederieke van Duijnhoven, Jelle Wesseling, Eveline Bleiker. Active surveillance versus conventional treatment in low-risk DCIS; women’s preferences in the LORD trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-05-11.